Flooding ecology of voles, mice and shrews: the importance of geomorphological and vegetational heterogeneity in river floodplains

• Published in: Acta Theriologica
• Main Authors: Wijnhoven, S., Velde, G. van der, Leuven, R.S.E.W., Smits, A.J.M.
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: unknown
• Published: 2005
• Subjects: Animal Ecology and Physiology; Environmental Sciences; Microtus arvalis
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/2066/32511; https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03192639

Contains fulltext : 32511.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access) Since voles, mice and shrews are important animals in food chains of river floodplains, there is a need for data on their spatial and temporal distribution in periodically flooded areas. During a live trapping study between two successive floods in an embanked river floodplain, the ’Afferdensche en Deestsche Waarden (ADW)’, six species were frequently observed, viz,Microtus arvalis (Pallas, 1778),Clethrionomys glareolus (Schreber, 1780),Sorex araneus (Linnaeus, 1758),Crocidura russula (Hermann, 1780),Micromys minutus (Pallas, 1771) andApodemus sylvaticus (Linnaeus, 1758). Ungrazed rough herbaceous vegetation appeared to be rich in numbers and species, whereas no spoors of small mammals were observed in large parts of the ADW floodplain (eg bare substrates and maize fields). Vegetation structure seemed to be very important in guiding the recolonisation process after flood events. Throughout the year the highest numbers of small mammals were captured on and near the non-flooded elevated parts functioning as refugia during inundation. Poor habitat connectivity, sparseness of non-flooded recolonisation sources and small numbers of survivors led to slow recolonisation. The time between two successive floods (eight months) was not long enough for entire recolonisation of ADW. Small mammal densities at more than 30 m from the non-flooded areas were always lower than in non-flooded areas.